ArticleNeurocritical care2026
DexSAH: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Dexmedetomidine in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDexmedetomidine is increasingly used for sedation in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH), but its effects on functional recovery, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), vasospasm, and biological markers of secondary brain injury remain uncertain. We systematically reviewed randomized and observational evidence while preserving the distinction between treatment effects and nonrandomized associations.
methodsWe searched databases for studies evaluating dexmedetomidine in patients with aSAH or related subarachnoid hemorrhage populations. Randomized controlled trials were synthesized separately from prospective and retrospective observational studies. The primary outcome was favorable functional outcome. Secondary outcomes included DCI, vasospasm-related outcomes, and biochemical markers of neuronal injury, metabolic stress, sympathetic activation, and inflammation.
resultsThree randomized trials comprising 431 participants contributed to the meta-analysis. Dexmedetomidine was not significantly associated with favorable functional outcome compared with control treatment (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.96-1.50; I
conclusionsRandomized evidence does not establish that dexmedetomidine improves functional outcome or prevents DCI or vasospasm after aSAH. Favorable biological signals and observational mortality associations support further investigation but do not establish causal neuroprotective benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42711630What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.